6:54 p.m.
A user is trying to call ejb3 beans from AS 5.1 -> AS 4.2.3
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4263032#...
I believe we do not cover this scenario in our compatibility matrix tests? All we test is
ejb2 access.
Shouldn't we provide "some" ejb3 compatibility guarantees (& testing)
going forward?
/Dimitris
10:07 p.m.
Calling EJB3 beans over major releases doesn't work.
If we truly ever want something like that then we need to have isolated
class loading bound to JNDI proxies, so that a proxy will use the right
client class versions.
Carlo
On 10/29/2009 06:54 PM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
A user is trying to call ejb3 beans from AS 5.1 -> AS 4.2.3
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4263032#...
I believe we do not cover this scenario in our compatibility matrix tests? All we test
is
ejb2 access.
Shouldn't we provide "some" ejb3 compatibility guarantees (& testing)
going forward?
/Dimitris
_______________________________________________
jboss-development mailing list
jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
9:31 a.m.
Carlo de Wolf wrote:
Calling EJB3 beans over major releases doesn't work.
If we truly ever want something like that then we need to have isolated
class loading bound to JNDI proxies, so that a proxy will use the right
client class versions.
It is never going to work if you don't plan for it. Customers will ask for this, and
in fact
many will expect this to work, so prepare a workaround for 4<->5 and put it in your
roadmaps
for 5<->6 :-)
I mean it might be hard to do it between 4 and 5, but between 5 & 6 where the codebase
is
uniform it should be easy to make it work without isolated classloading.
/D
Carlo
On 10/29/2009 06:54 PM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> A user is trying to call ejb3 beans from AS 5.1 -> AS 4.2.3
> http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4263032#...
>
> I believe we do not cover this scenario in our compatibility matrix
> tests? All we test is
> ejb2 access.
>
> Shouldn't we provide "some" ejb3 compatibility guarantees (&
testing)
> going forward?
>
> /Dimitris
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>
3:16 p.m.
Doubt it, especially if EJB3 does start using Remoting 3 for 6. Though I
imagine that R3 could be backported into 4 or 5 if one were sufficiently
motivated, I'm not so sure about the EJB3 side. :-)
- DML
On 10/30/2009 03:31 AM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
Carlo de Wolf wrote:
> Calling EJB3 beans over major releases doesn't work.
> If we truly ever want something like that then we need to have isolated
> class loading bound to JNDI proxies, so that a proxy will use the right
> client class versions.
It is never going to work if you don't plan for it. Customers will ask for this, and
in fact
many will expect this to work, so prepare a workaround for 4<->5 and put it in your
roadmaps
for 5<->6 :-)
I mean it might be hard to do it between 4 and 5, but between 5& 6 where the
codebase is
uniform it should be easy to make it work without isolated classloading.
/D
>
> Carlo
>
> On 10/29/2009 06:54 PM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
>> A user is trying to call ejb3 beans from AS 5.1 -> AS 4.2.3
>> http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4263032#...
>>
>> I believe we do not cover this scenario in our compatibility matrix
>> tests? All we test is
>> ejb2 access.
>>
>> Shouldn't we provide "some" ejb3 compatibility guarantees (&
testing)
>> going forward?
>>
>> /Dimitris
>> _______________________________________________
>> jboss-development mailing list
>> jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>>
>
_______________________________________________
jboss-development mailing list
jboss-development(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
3:44 p.m.
Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
Carlo de Wolf wrote:
> Calling EJB3 beans over major releases doesn't work.
> If we truly ever want something like that then we need to have isolated
> class loading bound to JNDI proxies, so that a proxy will use the right
> client class versions.
It is never going to work if you don't plan for it. Customers will ask for this, and
in fact
many will expect this to work, so prepare a workaround for 4<->5 and put it in your
roadmaps
for 5<->6 :-)
I mean it might be hard to do it between 4 and 5, but between 5 & 6 where the
codebase is
uniform it should be easy to make it work without isolated classloading.
I disagree. There was large discussion in the past on this topic, and
the consensus was that the community releases would favor delivering
innovation rapidly over ensuring backwards compatibility. True wire
compatibility between major revs is a non-trivial engineering effort.
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
5291
days inactive
5292
days old
jboss-development@lists.jboss.org
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Carlo de Wolf -
David M. Lloyd -
Dimitris Andreadis -
Jason T. Greene